ANKARA MAYOR MANSUR YAVAŞ FACES INDICTMENT OVER TENDERS

A significant legal challenge has emerged for one of Türkiye’s most prominent political figures, as the Ankara Chief Public Prosecutor’s Office has filed a formal indictment against Mansur Yavaş, the Mayor of the Ankara Metropolitan Municipality (hereinafter: ABB). This development follows a lengthy investigation into the municipality’s procurement practices for public events. The indictment accuses Mayor Yavaş and 26 other individuals of serious offences related to public tenders, with prosecutors requesting a potential prison sentence of up to 31 years for the mayor.

The Core Of The Mansur Yavaş Indictment

The legal action is built upon two primary charges: “collusive tendering” and “misconduct in office.” The prosecutor’s office alleges that these actions led to a direct and substantial financial loss for the public, estimated in the indictment to be 154 million Turkish Lira. The case revolves around a series of tenders awarded by ANFA Altınpark İşletmeleri, a commercial subsidiary of the municipality, for the organisation of various large-scale public events, including national holiday concerts and city festivals, that took place between 2022 and 2024.

According to the indictment, the alleged financial damages were incurred because the tender process was deliberately manipulated to prevent fair and open competition. This, prosecutors argue, resulted in contracts being awarded at inflated prices, thereby harming the public budget. The legal document contends that the responsibility for this loss ultimately rests with the senior management of the municipality, including the mayor, who are accused of either directing or failing to prevent the alleged illegalities.

Procurement Practices Under Investigation

The specific mechanism at the centre of the prosecution’s case involves the alleged misuse of “direct procurement” methods. The indictment claims that the municipal subsidiary, ANFA, intentionally broke down what should have been large, single tenders into numerous smaller, separate contracts. By keeping the value of each individual contract below the legal threshold that mandates a full, competitive open tender, officials were allegedly able to award the work directly without public bidding.

Prosecutors argue that this “fragmentation” of the procurement process was a deliberate strategy to circumvent public tender laws. The indictment further alleges that this method was systematically used to channel a series of contracts for different events to a single, predetermined company. This practice, according to the prosecution, constitutes collusive tendering, as it effectively created a non-competitive environment and ensured a specific contractor was favoured, contrary to the principles of transparency and fairness in the use of public funds. The investigation scrutinised the entire chain of command and approval processes within the municipality and its subsidiary that allowed for this procurement method to be utilised repeatedly.

The Procedural Path To Prosecution

The journey to this indictment of Mansur Yavaş began not with the prosecutor’s office, but with an audit conducted by inspectors from the Ministry of Interior. These inspectors compiled a detailed report on the municipality’s event tenders, which identified the alleged irregularities and formed the basis of the case. In the Turkish legal system, the prosecution of high-level elected officials, such as metropolitan mayors, for offences related to their duties requires a preliminary step: permission from the Ministry of Interior.

Following the submission of the inspectors’ findings, the Ankara Chief Public Prosecutor’s Office formally requested this permission to launch a full criminal investigation into Mayor Yavaş and other implicated officials. The Ministry subsequently granted this request, allowing the prosecutor to proceed with gathering evidence, taking statements, and ultimately, drafting the formal indictment that has now been filed with the court. The court will now review the indictment and decide whether to accept the case and schedule the commencement of a trial.

Commentary

In the past, there have been many cases of illicit tendering in Türkiye. Especially in the construction sector, contracts are awarded to companies that either promise loyalty to the responsible political faction or further the monetary interests of said faction. In the case of Mansur Yavaş, the motives are not quite clear yet. At the current stage, there are also question marks around whether these tender procedures were deliberately planned or whether there are administrative grounds that justify the method. It is very likely that the former is the case here.

In any case, public tenders are a sensitive issue. It is one of the more important tools of politicians to support national businesses while developing important projects for societal success. Irregularities and breaches of the principles of public tendering - especially, disregarding the core principle of transparency - significantly harm the legitimacy of the political system. Moreover, it demotivates enterprises to do business with the government. On the one side, investing resources to win a tender where the outcome is unpredictable, or rather very predictable, is a business decision only a few will make. On the other side, companies will seek other ways to develop their businesses, knowing they will need to make up for a competitive disadvantage.

Finally, Mansur Yavaş’s popularity in the political landscape has increased with the imprisonment of Ekrem İmamoğlu. With the ongoing power vacuum within the Cumhuriyet Halk Partisi (hereinafter: CHP), the indictment could be a strategic move to prevent Mansur Yavaş from filling the power vacuum within the CHP. Since the CHP remains the biggest opposition party in Türkiye, putting the leading figures under pressure with legal procedures hampers its organisational capabilities. However, if such motives lie under the filing of the indictment, the same values of fair competition would have been breached.